The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about The Lokpal Act, 2013. For Lokpal, an article containing general purpose
definition and the Jan Lokpal Bill in particular, see Lokpal. For Jan Lokpal Bill, a draft anti-
corruption bill written by the civil society group, India Against Corruption, see Jan Lokpal
Bill.
This article is outdated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly
available information. (December 2013)
It has been suggested that this article be split into multiple articles. (Discuss)
Proposed since December 2013.

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013

Parliament of India
A bill to provide for the establishment of a body of
Lokpal for the Union and Lokayukta for States to
inquire into allegations of corruption against certain
public functionaries and for matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto.[1]
Citation 134-C of 2011
Territorial extent India
Enacted by Rajya Sabha
Date passed 17 December 2013
Enacted by Lok Sabha
Date passed 18 December 2013
Date assented to 1 January 2014
Signed by Pranab Mukherjee
Date commenced 16 January 2014
Legislative history
The Lokpal Bill, 2011 (Lok Sabha)[2]
Title:
The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2011 (Rajya Sabha)[3]
History: Introduced in Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011.[4]
 Referred to The Parliament's Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances
and Law and Justice on 8 August 2011.[5]

Re-introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011.[6]

Passed by Lok Sabha on 27 December 2011.[7]

Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 29 December 2011.[8]

Re-introduced in Rajya Sabha on 21 May 2012.[9]

Referred to The Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha on 21 May 2012.[10]

The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha on 17 December 2013 and in the Lok Sabha
on 18 December 2013.[11]

The Lokpal Act, 2013, officially The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, is an anti-
corruption Act of Indian Parliament in India which "seeks to provide for the establishment of
the institution of Lokpal to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public
functionaries and for matters connecting them".[12]

The bill was tabled in the Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 and was passed by the house on
27 December 2011 as The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2011. The bill was subsequently
tabled in the Rajya Sabha on 29 December 2011. After a marathon debate that stretched until
midnight of the following day, the vote failed to take place for lack of time.[13] On 21 May
2012, the bill was referred to a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha for consideration. The
bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha on 17 December 2013 after making certain amendments to
the earlier Bill and in the Lok Sabha on 18 December 2013.[11] The Bill received assent from
President Pranab Mukherjee on 1 January 2014 and came into force from 16 January
2014.[14][15]

The bill was introduced in parliament following massive public protests led by anti-
corruption crusader Anna Hazare and his associates.[16] The bill is one of the most widely
discussed and debated bills in India, both by the media and the People of India at large, in
recent times.[17] The protests were named among the "Top 10 News Stories of 2011" by the
magazine Time.[18][19] The bill received worldwide media coverage.[20][21][22]

In 2011, India ranked 95th in the Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International.
A recent survey estimated that corruption in India had cost billions of dollars and threatened
to derail growth.[23][24][25] India lost a staggering $462 billion in illicit financial flows due to
tax evasion, crime and corruption post-Independence, according to a report released by
Washington-based Global Financial Integrity.[26]

Contents
 1 Background
 2 History
o 2.1 2010 draft bill
 o 2.2 Joint draft bill
 2.2.1 First draft meeting
 2.2.2 Second draft meeting
 2.2.3 Third draft meeting
 2.2.4 Fourth draft meeting
 2.2.5 Fifth draft meeting
 2.2.6 Sixth draft meeting
 2.2.7 Seventh draft meeting
o 2.3 Union Cabinet approved bill
o 2.4 Standing Committee bill
 3 Enactment by the Lok Sabha
 4 Journey through The Rajya Sabha
o 4.1 Winter session, 2011
o 4.2 Budget session, 2012
o 4.3 Monsoon session, 2012
 5 See also
 6 Notes
 7 Further reading
 8 References
 9 External links

Background
The term Lokpal was coined in 1963 by Laxmi Mall Singhvi, a member of parliament during
a parliamentary debate about grievance mechanisms.[27] The Administrative Reforms
Commission (ARC) headed by Morarji Desai submitted an interim report on "Problems of
Redressal of Citizen's Grievances" in 1966. In this report, ARC recommended the creation of
two special authorities designated as 'Lokpal' and 'Lokayukta' for redress of citizens'
grievances. The word was derived from the Sanskrit words "Lok" (people) and "Pala"
(protector/caretaker), meaning 'Caretaker of People'.[28]

Maharashtra was the first state to introduce Lokayukta through The Maharashtra Lokayukta
and Upa-Lokayuktas Act in 1971.[29][30] Presently, there are no Lokayuktas in the states of
Andra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram,
Nagaland, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura and West Bengal.

The Lokpal bill was first introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1968. The version enacted in 2013
was from a draft prepared in 2010.[31] The bill is an implementation of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988.[32] Eleven parliamentary panels have been formed to discuss the
Lokpal bill.[33]

Recurring cost of lokpal over the years[34]

Year Cost of lokpal (recurring) Status of bill

1968 Rs. 300,000 The Fourth Lok Sabha dissolved before the bill
 could be passed by the Rajya Sabha. The bill
lapsed.

This bill lapsed on dissolution of the Fifth Lok

1971 Rs. 2 million
Sabha.

The Sixth Lok Sabha dissolved just before the

1977 Rs. 2.5 million recommendations of the Joint Select Committee
could be considered.

1985 Rs. 2.5 million This bill was withdrawn by the government.

This bill lapsed on dissolution of the Ninth Lok

1989 Rs. 3.5 million
Sabha.

The Standing Committee presented its report to

Parliament on 9 May 1996. However, the Lok
1996 Rs. 10 million
Sabha was dissolved before government could
finalise its stand.

The Twelfth Lok Sabha was dissolved before

government could take a view on the
1998 Rs. 10 million
recommendations made by The Parliamentary
Standing Committee.

The Lok Sabha was dissolved. Hence, the bill

2001 Rs. 15 million
lapsed.

The Government's version of Passed by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Rajya
2011/2012 Lokpal does not have any Sabha passed the bill on 17 December 2013. Lok
financial memorandum. sabha passed the bill on 18 December 2013.

History
2010 draft bill
Anna Hazare's hunger strike at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi

The 2010 draft[35] was created by the United Progressive Alliance to create an Ombudsman
tasked with tackling political corruption.[36] The draft was circulated to various ministries for
their review. It provided a mechanism for filing complaints against the prime minister,
ministers and MPs.[37] However, civil society groups were not and rejected it as a toothless
body with only recommendatory powers.[38][39]

Hazare started an indefinite hunger strike on 5 April 2011 to pressure the government to
create an ombudsman with the power to deal with corruption in public places as envisaged in
the Jan Lokpal Bill. The fast led to nation-wide protests in support. The fast ended on 9 April,
one day after the government accepted his demands.[40] The government issued a gazette
notification on the formation of a joint committee, consisting of government and civil society
representatives, to draft the legislation.[41]

Joint draft bill

A Joint Drafting Committee was established, consisting of five ministers and five members of
the civil society. The chairman of the Joint Drafting Committee was Pranab Mukherjee. The
Committee set 30 June 2011 as the deadline to complete the drafting process.[42][43]

Ten member Joint Drafting Committee

Member Name Party
Pranab Mukherjee Union Minister of Finance
P. Chidambaram Union Minister of Home Affairs
M. Veerappa Moily Union Minister of Law and Justice
Kapil Sibal Minister of Communication and Information Technology
Salman Khursheed Union Minister of Water Resources
Anna Hazare Civil society
N. Santosh Hegde Civil Society, Retired Judge Supreme Court of India
Shanti Bhushan Civil Society, Former Union Minister of Law and Justice
Prashant Bhushan Civil Society
Arvind Kejriwal Civil Society

First draft meeting

All of the Joint Draft meetings took place at the North Block

The Committee first met on 16 April in 2011, in the North Block and lasted for about ninety
minutes.[44] Team Anna presented their version of the bill with a slight modification relating
to the selection panel to choose the Lokpal and its members. Under the revised proposal, the
Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha were replaced with the
Rajya Sabha chairman and the Lok Sabha Speaker. The meeting was allegedly recorded and
the Committee claimed that decisions would be made available to the general public. HRD
Minister and Committee member Kapil Sibal, said that both the sides were keen that the new
Bill should be introduced in the Monsoon session, which would begin early July.[45][46]

Second draft meeting

The Committee met as planned on 2 May in 2011. The meeting was termed "very good" and
with "no difference of opinion" between the panel members.[47] Sibal said that the meeting
discussed the document presented previously by the civil society members. Prashant Bhushan
said, "The meeting was mainly to discuss the basic principles behind the Jan Lokpal Bill. The
discussion was on essential features, objects and reasons of the bill which have been prepared
according to the main provisions of the UN Convention against Corruption. All signatories of
the United Nations Convention against Corruption have to pass this kind of law."[48][49] In
May 2011, the Indian Government had ratified two UN Conventions – the United Nations
Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) and its three protocols.[50][51]

Third draft meeting

Kapil Sibal, member of the Joint Drafting Committee of Lokpal

After the third meeting on 7 May in 2011, Bhushan said "Lokpal will have powers to initiate
investigation and prosecution and will not need permission from the government. The model
on which the financial independence will be based is yet to be decided. Various models were
discussed, including from other countries and of institutions like the Supreme Court, the
Comptroller and Auditor General and the Central Vigilance Commission."[52]

Kapil Sibal said the meeting was "exceptionally constructive" and added, "The approach was
very constructive. There were areas of broad agreement, including the process of appointment
of Lokpal which should be transparent."[53] Another group of civil society members led by
Aruna Roy and Harsh Mander working for a strong Lokpal Bill, upped its ante against Team
Anna. Under the banner of the "National Campaign for People's Right to Information"
(NCPRI)[54] they claimed that Anna's diktat could be dangerous and that the government's
functioning could not be handled by one group.[55][56][clarification needed]

Fourth draft meeting

The 23 May meeting in 2011 lasted over three hours and the two sides agreed "in-principle"
on half of the 40 basic principles for the anti-graft Lokpal bill proposed by the civil society
members.[57][58][59]

Fifth draft meeting

At the 30 May 2011 meeting the chairman made it clear during the discussion that the matters
pertaining to the exclusion of Prime Minister, Judiciary would be a part of the discussions on
the scope of the Lokpal. The Chairman of the Panel announced that the conduct of the MPs'
inside Parliament would remain outside its remit of the Lokpal to comply with [Article
105(2)] of the Constitution and that the views of the State and the political parties would be
discussed with the civil society members.[60] These announcements created a stalemate
between the Committee's two-halves.[61]

Sixth draft meeting

Team Anna boycotted 6 June 2011 meeting, alleging that the police crackdown on Baba
Ramdev had "strengthened the doubts" about the government's intentions and demanded that
the next meeting be rescheduled because of Hazare's other commitments.[62] Shanti Bhushan
produced a letter that was read by the Chair "indicating their inability to attend the meeting"
and "that what happened at the Ramlila ground had nothing to do with the proceedings of the
Joint Drafting Committee". The chairman suggested that the drafting should be the focus.
Post meeting, the draft was to be circulated to the other political parties for their
consideration. They rescheduled the seventh meeting to 15 June.[63][64]

Seventh draft meeting

The two hours event took place on 15 June in 2011, with out agreement on several issues.
Both sides furnished versions to the Union Cabinet for consideration.[65] Team Anna blamed
the government for not being serious, claiming "The government is planning to kill Lokpal
before it's born".[66] The civil society members suggested that the Lokpal be empowered to
probe corruption cases in instead of the departmental probes and CBI inquiries of the prior
approach. The government rejected the idea. Chief Ministers of several BJP-ruled states
expressed surprise that they were being consulted before the final draft was ready. Chief
ministers of Congress-ruled states backed the Centre's stand and opposed bringing the prime
minister under the Lokpal's ambit. BJP-ruled states sought wider deliberations. Opposition
parties demanded to comment on the whole bill rather than on the six contentious issues.[67]
Anna Team demanded that the audio of the proceedings be made available to them. Hazare
threatened to resume an indefinite fast if the bill was not passed by 15 August.[68][69]

Comparison of Draft Lokpal Bill with the Jan Lokpal Bill[70]

Draft Lokpal Bill, 2011 (government Draft Jan Lokpal Bill, 2011
Issues
representatives) (nominees of Anna Hazare)
Chairperson and 10 members (at least 4
Chairperson and 10 members (at least 4 members with legal background). The
Composition
judicial members) Chairperson to have extensive
knowledge of law.
Tenure Five years or till he is 70 years Five years or till he is 70 years
Presidential appointment on the Presidential appointment on the
Manner of
recommendation of the selection recommendation of the selection
appointment
committee. committee.
Prime Minister, Leader of the
Prime Minister, speaker, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, 2 judges
House of which PM is not member, of the Supreme Court, 2 chief justices
Minister of Home Affairs, Leader of of a high court, the Chief Election
Committee the Opposition in both Houses, judge Commission, the CAG, and all
membership of Supreme Court, Chief Justice of a previous chairpersons of the Lokpal.
High Court, President of National The members shall be selected from a
Academy of Science, Cabinet Secretary list prepared by the Search Committee
(secretary of committee). (10 members including civil society
representatives).
A judicial member should have held
judicial office for at least 10 years or
Impeccable integrity with at least 25 been an advocate of the High Court or
years of experience in public affairs, Supreme Court for at least 15 years.
academics, commerce, finance etc. All members should be of impeccable
Once appointed, cannot be an MP, integrity with record of public service
Qualification MLA or be connected with a political especially in the field of corruption.
party, business or practice a profession. Must be a citizen of India at least 45
A judicial member has to be either a years old. Must have no case involving
Chief Justice of the High Court or a moral turpitude framed against him by
judge of the Supreme Court. a court. Cannot have been a
government servant within the last 2
years.
Complaint against members are made The President removes members on the
to the President who may refer it to the recommendation of the Supreme Court
Supreme Court who will conduct an made within 3 months of a complaint.
inquiry. The President may remove the Grounds for removal: misbehavior,
Removal
member, on the opinion of the Chief infirmity, insolvency, paid employment
Justice, on grounds of bias, corruption, outside the office. An Independent
insolvency, paid employment or Complaints Authority at the state level
infirmity. inquires into complaints against Lokpal

All corruption cases under the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It
covers MPs, Ministers, 'Group A'
officers, 'Group A' officers in a
company or body owned by the
government, any officer of a
Jurisdiction
government-financed society or trust or
funded by Foreign Contribution
(Regulation) Act, 1976 or that gets
funds from the public. Excludes PM,
judiciary and any action of an MP in
the Parliament or Committee.
Lokpal must conduct a preliminary
inquiry within 30 days. If there is no
prima facie case, the matter is closed.
Given a prima facie case, Lokpal
investigates after providing a suitable
forum to the accused. The investigation
Investigation
must be completed within six months
with an optional six-month extension
after giving reasons in writing. No
sanction shall be required by the
Lokpal to investigate any complaint
against a public servant.
The Lokpal may constitute a
prosecution wing headed by a director
who files cases in the Special Court (to
be constituted by the central
government on recommendation of the
Lokpal). Trials must complete within
one year, which may be extended to
two years for reasons given in writing.
No sanction is required to file a case
against a public servant. The Lokpal
files cases in the Special Court and
sends a copy of the report to the
Prosecution
competent authority.
Procedure for persons other than
MPs and ministers: The competent
authority is the Minister for officers of prescribed.
government bodies and the society
head for officers of societies. The
Lokpal recommends disciplinary
proceedings to the competent authority judge of the Supreme Court or High
and provides a copy of the report to the Courts only with permission of a 7-
accused. The competent authority must member bench of the Lokpal. If the
take action within 30 days and inform Lokpal grants permission to investigate
staff.
Offences by a public servant, including
government employees, judges, MPs,
Ministers, and the Prime Minister
under the Indian Penal Code and the
1988 Corruption Act. Any offence
committed by an MP in respect of a
speech or vote in the House; wilfully
giving or taking benefit from a person.
Victimizing a whistleblower or
witness.
When investigating corruption cases,
the CBI works under the Lokpal.
Investigation of the Prime Minister,
Ministers, MPs and judges of the
Supreme Court or High Courts require
the permission of a 7-member bench of
the Lokpal. Investigations can last 6 to
18 months. Investigation of
whistleblower complaints who are in
danger of victimisation, must be
completed within 3 months.
The CBI's prosecution wing moves
under Lokpal. After an investigation is
completed, the Lokpal may either
initiate prosecution against the accused
or impose penalty or both. The Lokpal
can initiate prosecution in the Special
Court formed under the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988.
The Lokpal shall appoint retired judges
or retired civil servants as judicial
officers. A bench of judicial officers
can impose a penalty on a public
servant after conducting an inquiry.
The decision shall be subject to
approval from a higher authority to be
Prosecution can be initiated against the
Prime Minister, Ministers, MPs and
 the Lokpal within 6 months of
initiating disciplinary proceedings.
Procedure for MPs and ministers:
The competent authority is the PM for
Ministers and the Lok Sabha or Rajya
Sabha for MPs. The Speaker/Chairman
tables the report in Parliament. The
House reports to the Lokpal on any
action taken within 90 days.
Any person making false and frivolous
or vexatious complaints shall be
Penalty
penalised with 2 to 5 years of jail and
fine of Rs 25,000 to Rs 200,000.
Funding Paid by Consolidated Fund of India.
The Lokpal can search and seize
documents, attach property for 90 days, license or blacklist a company. If
Other
file for confirming the attachment
powers
within 30 days, and recommend
suspension of the accused.
Union Cabinet approved bill
The government moved its version of the bill[1] in the Lok Sabha on 4 August, the ninth such
introduction. The bill was introduced by the Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office,
or initiate prosecution, no sanction is
required from any other authority.
For any act of corruption, the penalty
shall be from six months to life
imprisonment. If the beneficiary for an
offence is a business entity, a fine of up
to five times the loss caused to the
public shall be recovered. If a company
director is convicted, the company
shall be blacklisted from any
government contract. Convicted public
servants are removed from office.
Persons making a false complaint, are
fined up to Rs 100,000. False
complaints against a member of the
Lokpal may result in 3 months
imprisonment.
Paid by Consolidated Fund of India.
The budget of the Lokpal should not be
less than 0.25 percent of total
government revenue. No sanction
required from government to incur
expenditure. The CAG audits Lokpal
and a Parliamentary Committee
evaluates Lokpal operations.
The Lokpal can receive complaints
from whistle-blowers, issue search
warrants, attach property, recommend
cancellation/modification of a lease or
recommendation of Lokpal is not
accepted it can approach the High
Court. A bench of the Lokpal can
approve interception and monitoring of
messages transmitted through
telephone or internet.
V Narayanasamy. Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj opposed the exclusion of the prime
minister from the purview of the proposed Lokpal. V Narayanasamy told the House that
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was in favour of bringing his office under the purview of
the Lokpal, but the Cabinet rejected the idea after deliberation.[71] Anna Hazare burnt copies
of the bill, to protest the government's lack of sincerity.[72][73]

On 27 August the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha passed a Pranab Mukherjee-proposed
resolution conveying the sense of the House on the Lokpal Bill.[74] The House agreed 'in
principle' on a Citizen's Charter, placing the lower bureaucracy under the Lokpal and
establishing the Lokayukta in the States.[75]

Standing Committee bill

31-member committee consisting of 25 MPs belonging to 22 political parties with 6 seats vacant[76]
Member Name Party Member Of
Abhishek Manu Singhvi Congress Rajya Sabha
Chandresh Kumari Congress Lok Sabha
N.S.V. Chitthan Congress Lok Sabha
Deepa Dashmunsi Congress Lok Sabha
Prabha Kishore Taviad Congress Lok Sabha
Manish Tewari Congress Lok Sabha
P.T. Thomas (Idukki) Congress Lok Sabha
Meenakshi Natrajan Congress Lok Sabha
Balavant alias Bal Apte BJP Rajya Sabha
D.B. Chandre Gowda BJP Lok Sabha
Harin Pathak BJP Lok Sabha
Jyoti Dhurve BJP Lok Sabha
Devji M Patel BJP Lok Sabha
Parimal Nathwani Independent Rajya Sabha
Amar Singh Independent Rajya Sabha
Kirodi Lal Meena Independent Lok Sabha
Ram Jethmalani Nominated Member Rajya Sabha
Ram Vilas Paswan LJSP Rajya Sabha
O.T. Lepcha SDF Rajya Sabha
Lalu Prasad RJD Lok Sabha
Shailendra Kumar SP Lok Sabha
Monazir Hassan JD(U) Lok Sabha
S. Semmalai AIADMK Lok Sabha
Vijay Bahadur Singh BSP Lok Sabha
R. Thamaraiselvan DMK Lok Sabha

The Jan Lokpal Bill was submitted to the committee by Congress MP from Bareilly Praveen
Singh Aron.[77] The draft bill was distributed to members on 28 November. The committee
recommended keeping judiciary and MPs' out of the Lokpal's purview and rejected the
demand to move the prosecution wing of CBI under its jurisdiction. Committee members had
unanimously recommended conferring constitutional status on the Lokpal and setting up of
Lokpal and Lokayuktas in states under one bill. The draft document did not take a position on
the inclusion of prime minister. Another of Team Anna's demands for inclusion of entire
bureaucracy was turned down, given that the draft favoured inclusion of Group A and B
officials, leaving out C and D staff.[78][79] Anna Hazare rejected this draft.[80][81][82]

At the final meeting on 7 December they decided to bring Group C and D officers under the
ambit of state Lokayuktas.[83] Sixteen dissent notes were submitted at the meeting by
members from BJP, BJD, SP, Congress, RJD and the Left.[84]

Enactment by the Lok Sabha

The Lokpal Bill was tabled in the Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011[85] and passed by voice
voting on the first day of the three-day extended session of the Winter session of the Lok
Sabha, on 27 December 2011, after a marathon debate that lasted over 10 hours.[86] The
lokpal body was not given the constitutional status as the Constitutional Amendment Bill,
which provided for making the Lokpal a constitutional body, was defeated in the house. The
Prime Minister described this as "a bit of disappointment", adding, "We have, however,
fulfilled our objective of bringing these bills to Parliament as we had promised."[87] The bill
passed by the house was termed "useless" by Team Anna, who reiterated their view that there
was no need to give constitutional status to such a weak Lokpal.[88]

The bill was passed in the Lok Sabha. But, it is pending in the Rajya Sabha

The government withdrew its previous version and had introduced a newer version of the bill.
RJD leader Lalu Prasad, along with the support from the other parties like SP, AIMMM and
LJP, demanded an inclusion of candidates from minorities in the nine member Lokpal Bench.
The government gave in to the demands of parties.[89] The principal opposition party, the
BJP, objected to it, classifying that such a move was illegal and asked the government to
withdraw the bill.[86][90] BJD, JDU, RJD, SP, TDP and Left said the bill was weak and wanted
it to be withdrawn.[85][91]

The bill passed by the house deleted the provision that gave presiding officers the power to
act against ministers and MPs, even before trial, but the exemption time of former MPs was
increased from five to seven years.[92] It excluded armed forces and coast guard from the
purview of the anti-graft body.[86] The lokpal would take complaints against the prime
minister after the consent of two-thirds of the Lokpal panel. The consent of state governments
is mandatory for the notification to set up Lokayuktas in the states, but the setting up of them
in the states was made mandatory. The appointment panel is loaded in favour of the
government. The Lokpal Bill was passed under Article 252[a] of the constitution of India. The
Prime Minister said, "We believe that the CBI should function without interference through
any Government diktat. But no institution and no individual, howsoever high he may be,
should be free from accountability."[94]
The Left, Samajwadi Party and BSP staged a walkout during voting of the bill, protesting that
their demands were not being met. At least 15 Congress members and close to a dozen
belonging to UPA allies were not present at the time of voting. The house also secured the
passage of the Whistleblowers Bill[95][96]

Journey through The Rajya Sabha

Winter session, 2011

Hamid Ansari, Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, adjourned the house sine die

The ombudsman debate was taken up by The Rajya Sabha during the last day of the three-day
extension of the winter session of Parliament, but the body recessed on 29 December without
voting.[97][98] The bill was debated for over 12 hours ending abruptly at midnight as the House
ran out of scheduled time. The House was adjourned sine die by Chairman Hamid Ansari. A
verbal duel marred proceedings as some members including UPA ally Trinamool Congress
interrupted V. Narayanasamy's defence of the Bill.[99] A vociferous opposition insisted on a
vote while the government maintained it needed time to reconcile the 187 amendments/
Confusion marked the proceedings. Ansari asked for the national anthem Jana Gana Mana to
be played, signalling the end of the proceedings and told the house:

This is an unprecedented situation…there appears to be a desire to outshout each other. There

is a total impasse. The House cannot be conducted in the noise that requires orderly
proceedings, I am afraid the Chair has no option…most reluctantly…I am afraid I can't and…

After a 15-minute adjournment between 11.30 and 11.45 PM, Pawan Kumar Bansal said that
the decision on extension of the House was the government's prerogative. Leader of the
Opposition Arun Jaitley charged that the government was running away from Parliament and
that the House should decide how long it should sit. He added:

You are creating an institution where you control the appointment mechanism, where you
control the removal mechanism. We will support the appointment of the Lokpal procedures,
but we cannot be disloyal to our commitment to create an integrity institution.[97]

Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M) said the House had expected the bill on Wednesday, but it came
only on Thursday, the last day of the session. Derek O'Brien said "This is a shameful day for
India's democracy. The government handled this situation very badly."[99] As the Opposition
insisted on a vote, Bansal said the government was willing provided that the House passed
the Bill voted by the Lok Sabha on Tuesday. This meant that the proposed amendments
would have to be set aside.

As stalemate and wrangling continued, the chairman called an end to the proceedings.[100][101]
Chidambaram defended the deferment of Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2011 in Rajya Sabha on
29 December contending that it was the "only prudent course" before the government and
that it had ensured that the Bill remained alive. He continued to attack the BJP and called the
amendments an "ingenious" method to scuttle the bill.[102] Hazare called off his hunger strike
prematurely, blaming poor health.[103]

Budget session, 2012

Members of the panel proposed by the government[104]

Member Name Party
Shantaram Naik Congress
Satyavrat Chaturvedi Congress
Shadi Lal Batra Congress
Arun Jaitley BJP
Rajiv Pratap Rudy BJP
Bhupendra Yadav BJP
KN Balagopal CPM
Shivanand Tiwari JD-U
Tiruchi Shiva DMK
Satish Mishra BSP
D Bandyopadhyay Trinamool Congress
Ramgopal Yadav SP
DP Tripathi NCP
V Maitreyan AIADMK
AK Ganguly Nominated

Activists pushing hoped that the House would approve the bill towards the end of the second
half of the budget session of 2012. The bill was re-introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 21 May
2012.[105] While moving the bill, the minister said that the differences had been narrowed. He
said that the government proposed to bring the lower bureaucracy under the Lokpal, which
would have investigation and prosecution powers. CVC would monitor Lokpal-referred
investigations by the CBI. There would be provisions for attaching properties and a time-
frame for investigations. An amendment was proposed whereby the states would pass the bill
so the national law would not be forced upon states. After the amended bill was introduced,
Narayanasamy, Samajwadi Party member Naresh Agrawal sought to send the bill to a select
committee. This was strongly objected to by BJP, the Left parties and BSP, with their
members arguing that only the minister concerned (Narayanasamy) could do so and accusing
the ruling coalition of "using the shoulder" of a "friendly opposition" party. After high drama
the government yielded and Narayanasamy moved the motion, which immediately passed by
voice vote. The 15-member select committee was to submit its report by the first day of the
last week of the Monsoon Session.[106][107]

The committee met on 25 June and decided on "wider consultations" with the government
officials and the public.[108] The panel invited public comments and called representatives of
various ministries for recording evidence.[109] The meeting was headed by senior Congress
MP Satyavrat Chaturvedi.[108] Law Secretary B A Agarwal was summoned to clarify various
matters.[109] The committee met again on 19 July 2012. The director of the CBI aired his
views in the meeting. He made it clear that the CBI is open to changes in the Lokpal bill that
strengthen the agency's autonomy by enhancing the proposed Lokpal's role in key
appointments like those of director, head of prosecution and lawyers who represent CBI. He
also mentioned in the meeting that the Lokpal should be given a significant say in appointing
the director of the prosecution wing instead of the process being controlled by the law
ministry as is currently the procedure, the persistent criticism about CBI's investigations
being throttled by political directives could be addressed as well. He opposed making the
prosecution or the anti-corruption wings subservient to the Lokpal. The select committee had
in its earlier sittings examined senior law officials who agreed with the members that the
prescription for lokayuktas under Article 253 that refers to fulfilment of international
obligations – in this case the UN convention against corruption – might not be feasible.
Recourse to international treaties to frame a law that impact the federal structure is not within
the ambit of the law. The Select committee referred the Bill for Public Suggestions in July
2012. In reply hundreds of responses were received to the Rajya Sabha. The committee took
a view and shortlisted certain recommendations and took Oral Evidence in physical presence
of the Members. Committee considered some of the most valid suggestions being done by the
Members. Mr. Deepak Tongli of Hyderabad had come with a proposal of setting up the lower
most unit to keep regular check on Anti Corruption in petty cases at District Level. In
addition few other members also shared their views in this regard. Mr. Tongli, 26 yrs aged
happened to be the youngest person to appear before the Parliamentary committee for Oral
Evidence at Rajya Sabha.[110]

Monsoon session, 2012

The monsoon session of parliament was to be held in August 2012. Hence, a bill that is
pending before the upper house whether or not it was passed by the Lok Sabha, does not
lapse on its dissolution. Hence, the bill is still alive in its present form.[111] The bill was not
expected to be tabled in the Rajya Sabha before the first day of the last week of the session.